Supreme Court jurors were asked yesterday to carefully consider the evidence in the trial of a man accused of murdering his six-month-old daughter and were cautioned not to fall back on a manslaughter verdict as an easy option.

Karim Salahuddin, 27, is accused of murdering Cassidy Ann Salahuddin on May 5, 2003, while she was in his care.

The six-man, six-woman jury heard closing arguments yesterday from both Crown prosecutor Kulandra Ratneser and defence lawyer John Perry QC.

While the Crown alleges Cassidy?s death was a result of shaken baby syndrome caused by her father, the defence has argued that the baby sustained her fatal injuries when her father fell while carrying her.

Mr. Perry asked the jury to consider the implications of a murder charge. The case was marked by rushed judgments, inaccurate Police statements and ?theoretical? medical evidence while the Crown had failed to establish the intent to commit murder, he claimed.

Police officers, doctors and a medical expert on shaken baby syndrome, Dr. Randall Alexander, testified over the course of the three-week trial.

?You have to exercise your judgment on fact and not theory dressed up as evidence,? said Mr. Perry. ?You can not say he is probably guilty ? gut feelings have no place in a court of law.?

Mr. Perry said Salahuddin tried to give an accurate version of events to Police, but his original lawyer Larry Scott did not give him proper legal advice.

But Mr. Ratneser said Salahuddin initially told Police that he had shaken Cassidy in an effort to get her to stop crying. He later said that was a fake story he had made up.

Mr. Ratneser read to the court from Salahuddin?s first Police statement: ?I slapped her with my right hand once on the left side. I picked her up and shook her ? she started crying again, she just wouldn?t stop. I shook her several times hard and her head was wobbling around. When I stopped shaking her, she stopped crying. I couldn?t hear her breathing. I put her on the bed and she started taking short, raspy breaths.?

But Mr. Perry argued that Salahuddin, a diabetic who was not caring for his diabetes properly at the time of the incident, was not properly advised by his lawyer at the time he made that statement.

He asked the jury to consider that the Police statements were neither videotaped nor recorded.

He used an original copy of the written Police statements to show how certain words were inserted into the manuscript.

Mr. Perry said a closer examination of the statement revealed that the words ?by shaking her? had been inserted by several handwritten marks.

Mr. Ratneser said every time a change was made to Salahuddin?s statements, the defendant had agreed to the changes.

He said: ?Every time an alteration was made, the initials were made next to the changes. These sort of rubbish allegations cannot be made against the Police.?

He also defended Salahuddin?s former attorney, Mr. Scott, saying there was no evidence of unprofessional behaviour and that the defence had never called the lawyer to give evidence.

Mr. Ratneser, a former Director of Public Prosecutions, told the jury to use their common sense and to question how Cassidy?s severe head and eye injuries could have been the result of a tumble down a hill in a pumpkin seat.

He said the infant exhibited all of the symptoms of shaken baby syndrome, as described by Dr. Alexander and several doctors from the King Edward VII Memorial Hospital who attended to Cassidy when she was brought in for medical attention.

?This baby was black and blue,? Mr. Ratneser said. ?Black and blue, inside out, by a mechanism explained by three highly-qualified doctors.?

Mr. Ratneser said the strength of expert, medical testimony had to be given proper credit and the jury should review the list of injuries to Cassidy described by several doctors ? namely massive bleeding in her eyes and internal injuries which included fractures and brain bleeding. The injuries found on Cassidy?s body told the story, regardless of whether or not she had been dropped in a pumpkin seat, as Salahuddin claimed.?

Mr. Perry asked the jury not to rush to an easy decision.

?Manslaughter is not murder,? He said. ?If you do not find him guilty of murder, do not find him guilty of manslaughter as an easy option. Manslaughter is not an easy option ? do not fall for it.

?This case is a tragedy. It?s a tragedy for the mother of Cassidy who lost her child. It?s also a tragedy for Karim Salahuddin who also lost his child. The last chapter needs to be written in this tragedy ? do not let it be the conviction of an innocent man.?

The case continues.